dismissed EB-2 NIW Case: Finance

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re: 23071624 
Appeal of Texas Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : FEB . 24, 2023 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (National Interest Waiver) 
The Petitioner, a financial advisor, seeks second preference immigrant classification as a member of 
the professions holding an advanced degree, as well as a national interest waiver of the job offer 
requirement attached to this EB-2 classification . Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) 
section 203(b )(2), 8 U.S.C. § l l 53(b )(2). 
The Director of the Texas Service Center denied the petition. Specifically, while the Director 
determined that the Petitioner qualifies as a member of the professions holding an advanced degree, 
and further acknowledged the substantial merit of the proposed endeavor, the Director concluded that 
the Petitioner did not establish the national importance aspect under the first prong of the analytical 
framework. See Matter of Dhanasar, 26 l&N Dec. 884, 889-90 (AAO 2016). The matter is now 
before us on appeal. 8 C.F.R. § 103.3. 
The Petitioner bears the burden of proof to demonstrate eligibility by a preponderance of the evidence. 
Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010). We review the questions in this matter 
de novo . Matter ofChristo 's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec . 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015) . Upon de novo review , 
we will dismiss the appeal. 
On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that her proposed endeavor of offering her services as a financial 
advisor will "generate substantial ripple effects upon key commercial and business activities on behalf 
of the United States" and will "contribute to the United States ' gross domestic product." In addition, 
the Petitioner emphasizes her "vast experience in significant business markets." For consideration on 
appeal, the Petitioner offers previously submitted documentation and updated evidence relating to her 
business . 
We adopt and affirm the Director 's decision. See Matter of Burbano, 20 l&N Dec. 872, 874 (BIA 
1994); see also Giday v. INS, 113 F.3d 230,234 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (noting that the practice of adopting 
and affirming the decision below has been "universally accepted by every other circuit that has 
squarely confronted this issue"); Chen v. INS, 87 F.3d 5, 8 (1st Cir. 1996) (joining eight U.S. Court of 
Appeals in holding the appellate adjudicators may adopt and affirm the decision below as long as they 
give "individualized consideration" to the case) . The Director thoroughly reviewed , discussed , and 
analyzed the Petitioner's national importance claims under the first prong of Dhanasar , including her 
submission of industry reports and articles relating to the value of financial workers in the United 
States, her job experience and skills, and her ownership of a company located in Florida . 
As addressed by the Director, the Petitioner's experience and abilities in her field relate to the second 
prong of the Dhanasar framework, which "shifts the focus from the proposed endeavor to the foreign 
national." Id. at 890. Moreover, the relevant question is not the importance of the industry or 
profession in which the individual will work; instead, we focus on "the specific endeavor that the 
foreign national proposes to undertake ." Id. at 889. Further, "we look for broader implications" of 
the proposed endeavor and that "[a]n undertaking may have national importance for example, because 
it has national or even global implications within a particular field." Id. 
Upon review of the record, we agree with the Director that the Petitioner has not established that her 
proposed endeavor, including operating her own business, sufficiently extends beyond her company 
and its clientele to impact the industry or the field more broadly, at a level commensurate with national 
importance. In Dhanasar , we determined that the petitioner's teaching activities did not rise to the 
level of having national importance because they would not impact his field more broadly. Id. at 893. 
Furthermore , the Petitioner has not demonstrated that the specific endeavor she proposes to undertake 
has significant potential to employ U.S. workers or otherwise offers substantial positive economic 
effects for our nation. Id. at 890. The petition will remain denied. 
ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. 
2